Gov. Chris Christie proposed new rules Thursday that would prohibit prescribers from accepting large payments from pharmaceutical companies, who annually dole out tens of millions of dollars to state doctors in hopes of selling their wares.

Citing the opioid crisis as justification, Christie said the rules would prevent drug- and device-makers from providing physicians with "lavish meals" and uncapped compensation for speaking engagements, consulting work, and other services.

"While the vast majority of doctors care for their patients honorably and professionally, their education about many of the drugs they are prescribing comes too often from pharmaceutical sales people, who may not always provide an objective analysis of the human and social impacts the drugs may have," Christie said.

I left these comments:

Do you want your doctor to have all available information when treating you? This new regulation would hamper your doctor’s access to important information about new drugs.

You can always count on politicians to exploit a crisis to expand the power of the state and restrict freedom. In this case, the “opioid crisis.” Not to minimize the seriousness of this addiction. But this is a prime case of punishing the innocent many for the wrongdoing of the few, which is inherent in one-size-fits-all government regulation. Note:

"While the vast majority of doctors care for their patients honorably and professionally, their education about many of the drugs they are prescribing comes too often from pharmaceutical sales people, who may not always provide an objective analysis of the human and social impacts the drugs may have," Christie said.

So all doctors and pharmaceutical sales people get regulated because a few doctors are not honorable and professional, and sales people “may” not be objective? It’s a backdoor smear of all doctors and pharmaceutical sales people, which amounts to preemptive law—assuming guilt without proof of any wrongdoing. This is the dirty little secret of government regulation: It unjustly punishes the innocent many in the name of punishing the guilty few.

And what better way to get educated than to consult with the foremost experts, the companies that actually make the stuff? You don’t have to rely blindly on what a salesperson says. You can and maybe should get independent confirmation. But to cut off this starting point of education is crazy.

Christie’s regulation also harms commerce in the medical product industry. This can only harm patients, because only by getting products from producers to patients, via doctors, can patients be helped by the products. Inhibiting the transfer of knowledge between producers and providers harms commerce and thus patients. By harming medical companies’ ability to market their products, their profits are curbed and so too are their ability to invest in new products. Christie proposes to “throw the baby out with the bathwater.”

What’s behind regulations like this one? Doctor Thomas P. Stossel says the “conflict of interest movement,” which he calls a mania, is behind it. Irrationally biased against and suspicious of the profit motive, the conflict of interest movement is contributing to “a prosecutorial extortion racket that has extracted enormous sums away from the [pharmaceutical] industry’s ability to develop new products by forcing it to pay fines for marketing behavior that has caused no damages and arguably provides mainly benefits.” Stossel lays it all out in his book “Pharmaphobia: How the conflict of interest myth undermines American medical innovation.” He writes:

“The medical product industry . . . provides physicians with the tools to save lives and reduce suffering. . . The public and the medical profession must demand a stop to the damage caused by conflict-of-interest regulations. It impedes transfer to physicians of important information regarding new options for patient care. It is a force built on shadows and lies. We cannot allow the conflict-of-interest propaganda machine to continue unchallenged.”

Amen.

As Christie himself states, and quoted in the article, not all doctors and sales persons are scoundrels. Most are not. The few that are should be handled through criminal law, such as anti-bribery statutes, under the just rules of evidence. Don’t punish the innocent. The government has no right to cut off legitimate marketing and collaboration without any evidence of wrongdoing, as if such practice is ipso-facto proof of lack of integrity. Such broad-brush regulation is fundamentally immoral. Lawmakers should seriously consider whether this bill does more harm than good.

------------------------------------------------------

Of course, doctors can refuse payments from or collaboration with pharmaceutical sales reps anytime they choose. Doctors’ practices can set rules and limits, etcetera. But like all regulations, this new Christie rule paints with a broad brush, punishing the innocent many for the wrongdoing of the few.

About Me

Greetings and welcome to my blog. My name is Michael A. (Mike) LaFerrara. I sometimes use the pen or "screen" name "Mike Zemack" or "Zemack" in online activism, such as posted comments on articles. “Zemack” stands for the first letters of the names of my six grandchildren. I was born in 1949 in New Jersey, U.S.A., where I retired from a career in the plumbing, building controls, and construction industries, and still reside with my wife of 45 years. The purpose of my blog is the discussion of a wide range of topics relating to human events. My analysis is informed by the principles of Objectivism, the philosophy of reason and independence originated by Ayn Rand.

As Rand observed: “The professional intellectual is the field agent of the army whose commander-in-chief is the philosopher.” I am certainly not the philosopher. But neither am I a field agent, or general. I am a foot soldier in that Objectivist army that fights for an individualist society in which every person can live in dignified sovereignty, by his own reasoned judgment, for his own sake, in that state of peaceful coexistence with his fellow man that only capitalist political and economic freedom can provide. While I am a fully committed Objectivist, my opinions are based on my own understanding of Objectivism, and should not be taken as definitive “Objectivist positions.” For the full story of my journey toward Objectivism, see my Introduction.

One final introductory note: I strongly recommend Philosophy, Who Needs it, which highlights the inescapable importance of philosophy in every individual's life. I can be reached at mal.atlas@comcast.net. Thanks, Mike LaFerrara.

Recommended Essays/Videos

Quotes I Like

Let me give you a tip on a clue to men’s characters: the man who damns money has obtained it dishonorably; the man who respects it has earned it. Run for your life from any man who tells you that money is evil. That sentence is the leper’s bell of an approaching looter.—Francisco d'Anconia

I love getting older...I get to grow up and learn things. Madalyn, 5 years old, Montesorri student, and my grand-daughter

The best thing one can do for the poor is to not become one of them. Author Unknown

Nature, to be commanded, must be obeyed. Francis Bacon

Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. Ronald Reagan

Thinking is hard work. If it weren't, more people would do it. Henry Ford

Intellectual freedom cannot exist without political freedom; political freedom cannot exist without economic freedom; a free mind and a free market are corollaries. Ayn Rand